You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

January 20, 2025

Thailand Releases Draft Platform Economy Act for Public Comment

Subscribe to Updates

Thailand’s official draft Platform Economy Act (PEA) was released on January 15, 2025, for public comment until February 15, 2025. The draft PEA is positioned as a general or overarching law for digital intermediary services and digital platform service businesses. The official release of the draft came after the sharing of the set of principles that would form the basis for the official draft PEA in November 2024. The draft PEA incorporates those principles and adds more detailed provisions.

Especially notable is that the draft PEA requires all intermediary service providers and online platform operators—both Thai and foreign—to appoint a point of contact to liaise with the Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA) if they have any users in Thailand. However, the draft PEA does not mandate establishment of a local entity in Thailand.

Types of Intermediary Services

The draft PEA sets out a three-tiered classification system for different types of service providers, ordered from fewest obligations to most:

  • Intermediary services. Intermediary services are further divided into three subcategories: mere conduit, caching, and hosting. Each type of intermediary service has different safe harbor provisions, which define their scope and limitations.
  • Online platform services. Online platform services are defined as involving “the provision of intermediary services in the hosting category that involve facilitating the matching of various types of users to enable transactions or interactions, whether or not a fee is charged. Additionally, such services may include other provisions to facilitate these transactions or interactions.” Key obligations for online platform providers include:
  • Informing users of their rights and duties under relevant laws
  • Implementing a notice-and-action mechanism
  • Disclosing advertising information
  • Publishing T&Cs, including details such as service fees, algorithms, and complaint management mechanisms.
  • Very large online platform services. Very large online platform services (VLOPs) have extra duties beyond regular online platform services, including reporting information, tracking users selling goods or services, suspending those who violate laws, preparing annual transparency reports, and giving prior notice for term changes. An online platform service will be classified as a VLOP if it:
  • Has annual revenue from online platform services in Thailand exceeding THB 1 billion;
  • Has an average monthly domestic user count exceeding 6 million; or
  • Poses significant risks to the economy, social security, or public well-being, as determined by the Digital Platform Economy Committee based on ETDA recommendations.

Designated Gatekeepers

The draft PEA also establishes “gatekeepers,” which refers to the 10 core platform service providers that:

  • Have a significant impact on Thailand’s economy or society—achieved by generating annual revenue of over THB 7 billion from core services in the country;
  • Act as an important gateway for business users to reach end users—evidenced by having more than 15 million end users per month and over 10,000 business users annually in the country; and
  • Have an entrenched and durable position—demonstrated by meeting the criteria for the number of end users and business users in the country consistently over the past three years.

Operators must provide information to the Platform Economy Committee for consideration of gatekeeper designation. The committee will officially announce the designated gatekeepers.

Under the draft PEA, gatekeepers have 14 additional obligations, including prohibiting discrimination against business users, allowing users to freely communicate and enter into contracts with end users, and disclosing advertising costs and other fees.

Trusted Flaggers

The draft PEA defines a trusted flagger as “a legal entity or group of individuals with specific qualifications or expertise, certified by the ETDA, to report suspected violations to the ETDA or online platform providers.” The draft PEA does not specify the specific duties of trusted flaggers; however, it allows the ETDA to implement measures to encourage or incentivize individuals to report suspected violations. Such measures may include granting special privileges, providing rewards, issuing certificates, or registering effective trusted flaggers.

Penalties

The draft PEA imposes phinai regulatory fines (a certain type of fine in Thai law that exists outside of the criminal or administrative legal mechanisms) and criminal penalties for violations of its provisions, with fines varying based on the severity of the offense. The maximum phinai regulatory fine is up to 0.3% of the global revenue generated from the operator’s digital platform services. Additionally, a digital platform’s operations may be temporarily suspended if the provider fails to address illegal activities conducted through the platform. Separately, potential criminal penalties focus primarily on protecting trade secrets that officials acquire during the course of their duties.

Regulatory Transition

Digital platform services must notify the ETDA under the Royal Decree on Operation of Digital Platform Service Businesses. This will be considered as reporting under the PEA. Providers required to report under the PEA must update the ETDA within 120 days of the PEA’s effective date.

For more information on compliance with Thailand’s requirements for digital platform services, please contact Tilleke & Gibbins’ digital platform specialists Athistha (Nop) Chitranukroh at [email protected], Pornpan Wichawut at [email protected], Rada Lamsam at [email protected], or Karnravee Jitvilai at [email protected].

Related Professionals

Industries

Fintech

Technology

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

April 10, 2026
Thailand has introduced new regulatory guidance requiring digital platform operators to adopt structured, transparent, and fair fee practices. On March 16, 2026, the Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA) published Announcement No. DPS 2/2569, titled “Guidelines for Transparency and Fairness in Digital Platform Service Fee Determination,” issued under the Royal Decree on Digital Platform Service Business Operations B.E. 2565 (2022). The guidelines establish a framework governing how digital platform operators should set, disclose, and adjust fees charged to users and related service providers such as logistics and payment providers. Although framed as best-practice guidance rather than legally binding rules with explicit penalties, the guidelines carry regulatory weight under the royal decree and represent a significant step toward structured governance of digital platform fee practices in Thailand. The guidelines establish various transparency principles and divide fees into two distinct categories—compulsory and additional—with specific governance principles for each. Transparency Principles The guidelines recommend that digital platform operators adopt several transparency measures to ensure that users can fully understand the costs of using a platform. Fee catalog. All fees should be consolidated into a single, accessible location, which should include the fee name, definition, scope of covered services, calculation methodology, rate, billing period, and calculation examples. Minimum service disclosure. Operators should disclose the minimum service that users can expect, such as baseline visibility, product listing capabilities, access to transaction data, and back-end dashboard access. Price structure disclosure. Operators should disclose the categories of costs underlying their fees, such as system maintenance, cybersecurity, and operational costs. While exact cost figures need not be made public, operators should be able to provide numerical data to regulators upon request. Clear fee formulas. Fee calculations should be simple and easy to understand—for example, percentage of net sales, cost per order, or cost per product listing. Operators should
Read More
April 10, 2026
As digital commerce continues to reshape consumer behavior in Thailand, the Office of the Consumer Protection Board (OCPB) has been taking steps to review and update key regulations for online platforms. The OCPB has had a particular focus on addressing the risks posed by e-marketplace businesses—from misleading product information to fraudulent online transactions. Some of the regulator’s current legislative efforts related to Thailand’s labeling regulations as well as potential changes to the country’s law on direct sales and marketing. Proposed Changes to Consumer Protection Labeling Regulations On February 24, 2026, the OCPB convened a public hearing to review the Notification of the Committee on Labels re: Specification of Goods as Controlled Label Goods B.E. 2565 (2022) and its annex issued under the Consumer Protection Act. The closed-door session, which started the OPCD’s process of seeking feedback on the proposed changes, brought together representatives from government agencies, business operators, and consumer groups. The OCPB explained that its review of the labeling regulations aims to address regulatory gaps arising from evolving commercial practices, particularly the expansion of e-commerce and cross-border transactions. Authorities highlighted recurring issues involving product information that is unclear, incomplete, or potentially misleading in digital sales channels. The proposed revisions are intended to improve consumers’ access to accurate and complete product information, ensure that label disclosures remain relevant amid the growth of e-commerce, and strengthen protections against deceptive or misleading digital advertising. The review is being undertaken pursuant to the Consumer Protection Act B.E. 2522 (1979). As part of the initiative, the OCPB signaled a potential update to the categories of “controlled label products” as well as enhanced disclosure obligations for business operators, with the broader aim of promoting greater transparency, reinforcing operator accountability, and aligning Thailand’s labeling framework with current market conditions. The OCPB secretary general emphasized that
Read More
April 9, 2026
As part of its ongoing public consultation process for the development of new practical guidelines under the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA), Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) held a two‑day public hearing on April 1–2, 2026. The hearing followed an online questionnaire and stakeholder engagement activities conducted in March 2026 and reflects the PDPC’s continued efforts to develop guidance that aligns international regulatory standards with Thai operational realities. The public hearing provided a forum for participants from both the public and private sectors to exchange views with the PDPC on the proposed guidance so that it responds to the needs of the business community while supporting effective and balanced enforcement of the PDPA. The PDPC emphasized that the consultation process is part of a wider policy objective to build trust in the convenient, secure, and internationally aligned exchange of data. Structure of the Consultation Process According to the PDPC, the initiative to develop the draft PDPA guidelines is being implemented through three core phases: Review of international best practices. The PDPC has conducted a comparative review of data protection guidance and regulatory approaches in jurisdictions with internationally recognized standards, including Singapore, the United Kingdom, the European Union (EU), and Japan. These materials are intended to serve as a reference point for developing practical recommendations across key subject areas under the PDPA. Identification of practical issues and challenges. To ensure that the guidelines respond to real‑world compliance challenges in Thailand, the PDPC has gathered views from a broad range of stakeholders across the public sector, the private sector, and the general public. This phase included focus group discussions and questionnaires aimed at identifying areas to provide organizations with greater clarity and consistency on regulatory expectations. Preparation of draft guidelines. Insights from the comparative study and stakeholder
Read More
April 3, 2026
On March 16, 2026, Vietnam’s Ministry of Public Security released a draft version of a new Decree on the Prevention and Combating of Cybercrime and High-Tech Crime to replace the currently effective Decree 25/2014/ND-CP. In the draft, the ministry has proposed a comprehensive regulatory framework aimed at addressing violations occurring within the cybersecurity domain, including measures related to intellectual property. Acts of Online IP Infringement Article 9 of the draft decree notably introduces specific provisions addressing online intellectual property infringement, with detailed lists of acts considered to constitute infringement in the online environment. Copyright and related rights infringement includes: Uploading or sharing works, performances, sound recordings, video recordings, broadcasts, computer programs, software, research, documents, theses, or other intellectual creations on digital platforms without the consent of the rights holder. Unauthorized livestreaming of copyrighted television programs, sporting events, or artistic performances. Uploading, sharing, storing, transmitting, or providing links to infringing works or digital content via websites, social networks, applications, or digital platforms. Providing or using software, tools, devices, or access codes to circumvent technological protection measures or evade lawful control mechanisms implemented by rights holders. Using artificial intelligence (AI) tools to replicate the ideas or structure of another person’s work without significant new creativity or without proper attribution, thereby causing damage to the original author. Industrial property infringement includes: Manufacturing, trading, advertising, or distributing counterfeit goods bearing counterfeit trademarks, geographical indications, or industrial designs, as well as goods infringing industrial property rights through online platforms. Unauthorized registration, appropriation, or use of domain names, account names, or digital identifiers that create confusion regarding the rights holder or the origin of goods or services. Producing, using, or offering for sale products containing all or part of a patented invention via online platforms. Advertising or introducing products with technical features or characteristics identical
Read More